Sexual Abuse Behind Bars - Just Detention International

More documents

Recommendations

Info

As in other parts of the country, gay and transgender inmates in New York corrections facilities are at a disproportionately high risk of sexual abuse. Take the case of a transgender woman whom I shall refer to using her initials, “D.W.” From May through October 2008, while incarcerated at the Shawangunk Correctional Facility, a men’s prison in Ulster County, D.W. experienced ongoing sexual harassment and abuse at the hands of another inmate. 11 Because of her assailant’s threats, D.W. feared for her safety and felt that it was too dangerous to report the abuse. When D.W. eventually decided she had no choice but to report the abuse, she hoped that corrections officials would immediately take steps to ensure her safety, provide treatment for the physical injuries she had suffered during the most recent sexual assault, and conduct a thorough investigation. Instead, in violation of agency policy, D.W. was charged with a disciplinary infraction for having engaged in a sexual act, based on the investigating officer’s flawed impression that the sexual conduct between D.W. and the assailant was “more consensual than it was….rape.” 12 As we hear in letters Just Detention International receives from inmates around the nation every week, incidents like these are far from rare. Corrections officials often conflate homosexuality and transgender identity with consent to rape, contributing to an environment in which sexual abuse thrives, and in which vulnerable inmates are left with nowhere to turn. As evidenced by the Amador case, a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of women inmates who were sexually abused by male staff while incarcerated in New York prisons, such abuse by corrections officials continues to be rampant in the state’s detention facilities. 13 Moreover, that case underscores that even when inmates have the 3
courage to come forward—including when multiple instances of abuse by the same official have been reported—it is rare that appropriate administrative and criminal sanctions are imposed. One of the defendants in Amador had multiple prior complaints lodged against him year after year; only when a woman inmate had sperm on her shirt after being forced to perform oral sex was he terminated from employment and criminal charges finally brought. 14 III. The U.S.’ Obligation to Address Sexual Abuse Behind Bars The sexual assault of prisoners, whether perpetrated by corrections officials or by other inmates, amounts to torture under international law. Torture is prohibited by Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, along with international conventions and treaties, including the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) 15 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 16 both of which have been ratified by the U.S. In 2006, the CAT Committee and the Human Rights Committee reviewed U.S. compliance with the CAT and the ICCPR respectively. Both committees recognize sexual violence in detention as part of their mandate and have identified it as a serious problem in the U.S. The CAT Committee commended certain U.S. initiatives, including the enactment of the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003, which calls for a “zero-tolerance” standard for rape in U.S. detention facilities. 17 However, the Committee detailed numerous concerns with U.S. policy and practice, including the failure to prevent sexual abuse of gay and transgender inmates and the failure to investigate instances of prisoner rape in a prompt and transparent manner. 18 4
Page 1 and 2: Sexual Abuse Behind Bars: A Human R
Page 3: year alone. 3 A BJS survey in count
Page 7: 1 Cindy Struckman-Johnson et al., S

Sexual Abuse Behind Bars - Just Detention International

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?